How does SEIV compare to SMAC?

[dmm]

While everyone's holding their breath waiting for the release of SEIV, and my program is calculating:

How does everyone think SEIV compares to that great game, Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri (SMAC)? (If you don't know what SMAC is, then probably you won't find this an interesting thread.) Of course, a straight comparison isn't possible since SMAC is planet-based rather than space-based, but what the heck, I'll start anyway. (This is all based on playing the full Version of SMAC and the .56 demo of SEIV.)

1) Without a doubt, combat in SEIV is much better. Even strategic combat is much better; tactical combat blows SMAC out of the water. When it comes right down to it, SMAC only has five kinds of combat -- regular, artillery, air, psi, and satellite. These are all very simple. You can't even have multiple units attack/defend at once. In contrast, all SEIV weapons have strength, range, accuracy, rate, speed, target limits, and special attributes. Ditto for SEIV defensive stuff.
2) Graphics are prettier in SMAC.
3) Storyline is great in SMAC. I don't think SEIV even has one.
4) SMAC has sound bites and videos when you complete research projects. I thought this was amazingly cool when I played the first few times, but now I usually cut them off. Does the full Version of SEIV have anything like this?
5) Music: SEIV demo doesn't have any, so I can't compare here.
6) Victory. I like how SMAC has multiple ways of winning. SEIV victory seems basically limited to the 4th X, eXterminate. (With variations like assimilate and subjugate.)
7) Tech tree: On the whole, I like SEIV's much better. I like the way you can ignore huge areas if you want, and that some areas are restricted to certain races. SMAC's is all tied together with overlapping prerequisites, so it is hard to ignore low-level techs. However, SEIV's is heavily slanted toward combat techs, which I don't like as well as SMAC's balance.
8) Base development: I like SMAC better here. The tech for base development (i.e., resource development, research enhancement, population control, etc.) is richer, more incremental, and has more immediate gains so there's much more incentive to develop sophisticated megabases. You don't need to have the most "acreage" to win in SMAC.
9) Base defense: But then here SMAC loses.
10) Intel: SEIV has more variety, but SMAC intel is easier to do early on in the game. And I like how the researchy guys in SMAC (University) are susceptible to covert ops.
11) Politics: Roughly even. I like how SMAC computer players will ask for specific help, and get more/less friendly if you help/decline.
12) Trade: I still haven't figured out trade in SEIV. I never do it. So I'll let someone else comment on that.

Well, that's enough for now. Anyone else have comments/opinions/rebuttals/info/flames/etc. ?